GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-12 > 1323392154
From: John German <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] King Tut's DNA- Youngest possible age of P312
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:55:54 -0500
So are the different databases causing inconsistent numbers of generations
or are consistent numbers of generations being manipulated with differing
ages? In the archives of these lists are arguments that generation age
should be the average father-son age difference found in genealogies; some
say 33 years, but others find 30 more convenient.
Is this the problem?
Alister John Marsh wrote:
"...it is hard for me to adjust to the possibility that P312 could be as
3,600 years old."
By May 2011 Michael Walsh had collected 337 of 67 marker haplotypes and kindly
sent them to me. The haplotype tree was nice and dandy, symmetrical and all tha
All 337 haplotypes contained 4956 mutations from the base haplotype of the tree
, which gives 4956/337/0.12 = 123 --> 141 "conditional" generations (25 years e
ach), that is 3525+/-360 years from a common ancestor.
The first 37 marker contained 3663 mutations, which gave 3663/337/0.09 = 121 --
> 138 generations, which is the same thing.
The first 25 marker contained 1981 mutations, which gave 1981/337/0.046 = 128 -
-> 147 generations, which is the same thing (3675+/-380 ybp).
I consider it as a "hard evidence" that a common ancestor of P312 bearers livin
g today, or at least of those 337 individuals lived around 3500-3600 years befo
re present. For various datasets this value varies between 3500 and 4200 ybp.
|Re: [DNA] King Tut's DNA- Youngest possible age of P312 by John German <>|